Expert-Panel Accreditation Evaluation-Practices: An Autoethnographic Case-Study in Spain

Juan Arturo Rubio Arostegui
{"title":"Expert-Panel Accreditation Evaluation-Practices: An Autoethnographic Case-Study in Spain","authors":"Juan Arturo Rubio Arostegui","doi":"10.18562/IJEE.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accreditation is defined by the European Higher Education Area qualityassurance agencies as a key element in quality management and continuous improvement in university teaching-learning processes, and is an institutional practice that started to be developed in 2014 in Spain where there is evident a oversizing of the quality assurance agencies for higher education. This paper illustrates the case of the Community of Madrid Quality Agency, as a case-study analysis through my experience as a panel member for the accreditation of higher-education qualifications. Methodologically, it is based on an autoethnographic approach and uses the theory of symbolic interactionism to reveal and analyse the evaluative process and culture. For this purpose, two analytical axes were drawn: student learning-outcomes and the value of the human resources assigned to the degree in terms of their academic research, both criteria which the quality agencies consider to be critical for a favourable final report. The interactions of the expert panel at the different stages of the accreditation consideration-process, based on these two criteria, are presented with the aim that future case studies will test them in the context of collaborative learning, helping to achieve the greatest possible academic rigor in the accreditation process. Key-words: Accreditation, Agentification, Evaluative Cultures, Peer Review, Learning Outcomes.","PeriodicalId":243145,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Educational Excellence","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Educational Excellence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18562/IJEE.033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accreditation is defined by the European Higher Education Area qualityassurance agencies as a key element in quality management and continuous improvement in university teaching-learning processes, and is an institutional practice that started to be developed in 2014 in Spain where there is evident a oversizing of the quality assurance agencies for higher education. This paper illustrates the case of the Community of Madrid Quality Agency, as a case-study analysis through my experience as a panel member for the accreditation of higher-education qualifications. Methodologically, it is based on an autoethnographic approach and uses the theory of symbolic interactionism to reveal and analyse the evaluative process and culture. For this purpose, two analytical axes were drawn: student learning-outcomes and the value of the human resources assigned to the degree in terms of their academic research, both criteria which the quality agencies consider to be critical for a favourable final report. The interactions of the expert panel at the different stages of the accreditation consideration-process, based on these two criteria, are presented with the aim that future case studies will test them in the context of collaborative learning, helping to achieve the greatest possible academic rigor in the accreditation process. Key-words: Accreditation, Agentification, Evaluative Cultures, Peer Review, Learning Outcomes.
专家小组认证评估-实践:西班牙的民族志案例研究
认证由欧洲高等教育区质量保证机构定义为质量管理和大学教学过程持续改进的关键要素,是2014年在西班牙开始发展的一种制度实践,西班牙的高等教育质量保证机构显然规模过大。本文通过我作为高等教育资格认证小组成员的经历,以马德里质量机构共同体为例进行了案例研究分析。在方法论上,它以自我民族志方法为基础,并使用符号互动主义理论来揭示和分析评估过程和文化。为此,绘制了两个分析轴:学生的学习成果和根据学术研究分配给学位的人力资源价值,质量机构认为这两个标准对于有利的最终报告至关重要。专家小组在认证考虑过程的不同阶段的互动,基于这两个标准,提出的目的是,未来的案例研究将在协作学习的背景下测试它们,帮助在认证过程中实现最大可能的学术严谨性。关键词:认证,认证,评价文化,同行评议,学习成果
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信